Allergic to semen... Condoms okay?

[SanctaMommy]

Hi again,

Yes, she is seeing an allergist at UCLA (she has other, more common allergies too.) Right now the allergy is not considered anaphylactic, but with repeated exposure it could possibly get to that point. The doctors seem convinced that, for now, a plain condom used “correctly” is sufficient. The doctor indicated that avoidance of the allergen is appropriate (as with children who have nut allergies.) He said this is the least expensive and least invasive way to deal with the issue for now. The priest told her to go ahead and use them to protect her body. She has an appointment tomorrow with my priest, who is a bit older and very conservative.

It’s hard because obviously asking them never to be intimate as husband and wife again is… problematic, to say the least. Using condoms brings up potential moral concerns. The doctors say that this issue is uncommon enough that there is no really effective treatment for it.

My other concern is children… Is depositing washed sperm into the uterus explicitly forbidden? No embryo would be created outside of the body, right?

 

[iloveangels]

Look, if you refuse to heed what the Vatican has to say about this, I can’t help you with it.

People always have the ability to claim that lies are truth, and I suppose this is just one of those times.

I’m not particularly bothered by this because I’m used to looking at non-Catholics. I’m a convert from a protestant family. But you should be concerned about it. Your opinion is directly contradictory to that of the Holy See.

 

[faithfully]

Actually, both ultrasound and hormone tests can be reliable indicators of whether ovulation has occurred or not. As to whether Catholic hospitals use these methods in the case of rape, I have no idea. But it’s not as much of a mystery as you are presenting it to be.

The ultrasound to the best of my knowledge is done vaginally (having had this type of ultrasound). The wand is rather forcefully crammed towards the ovary. You can see a well developed follicle. I’m NOT SURE, if you can tell if the egg has left the house or not. Regardless, (since this is being discussed in regards to rape), I can NOT fathom putting a victim through this. It’s extremely uncomfortable, borderline painful.

I’m pretty sure a hormone test is not terribly reliable. It would give you a range showing ovulation is possible. But it’s not a guarantee that it’s taken place.

 

[faithfully]

If her condition is that dangerous, no loving husband would trust a dime store bit of laytex (even if they were not immoral).

Prayers she finds a good doctor.

True!!!

 

[Havard]

Hi again,

Yes, she is seeing an allergist at UCLA (she has other, more common allergies too.) Right now the allergy is not considered anaphylactic, but with repeated exposure it could possibly get to that point. The doctors seem convinced that, for now, a plain condom used “correctly” is sufficient. The doctor indicated that avoidance of the allergen is appropriate (as with children who have nut allergies.) He said this is the least expensive and least invasive way to deal with the issue for now. The priest told her to go ahead and use them to protect her body. She has an appointment tomorrow with my priest, who is a bit older and very conservative.

It’s hard because obviously asking them never to be intimate as husband and wife again is… problematic, to say the least. Using condoms brings up potential moral concerns. The doctors say that this issue is uncommon enough that there is no really effective treatment for it.

My other concern is children… Is depositing washed sperm into the uterus explicitly forbidden? No embryo would be created outside of the body, right?

Eh?? Did her doctor look into and rule out the desensitization option?

webmd.com/allergies/news/20061113/semen-allergies-helped-by-frequent-sex

 

[faithfully]

My other concern is children… Is depositing washed sperm into the uterus explicitly forbidden? No embryo would be created outside of the body, right?

You are speaking of an IUI… Not allowed. It’s an interference between husband and wife relations.

 

[iloveangels]

Eh?? Did her doctor look into and rule out the desensitization option?

webmd.com/allergies/news/20061113/semen-allergies-helped-by-frequent-sex

She needs to press her doctors for something more effective. And if that doesn’t work, get another doctor. Condoms are not good enough, if she risks anaphylactic shock. They leak like crazy and do not prevent the kind of contact that could cause a reaction to surrounding skin.

Do what people always do when they have medical problems that aren’t being dealt with well-enough. Get a second opinion. Or a third. Or whatever it takes to get a satisfactory and moral solution.

 

[Castello]

Hi again,

Yes, she is seeing an allergist at UCLA (she has other, more common allergies too.) Right now the allergy is not considered anaphylactic, but with repeated exposure it could possibly get to that point. The doctors seem convinced that, for now, a plain condom used “correctly” is sufficient. The doctor indicated that avoidance of the allergen is appropriate (as with children who have nut allergies.) He said this is the least expensive and least invasive way to deal with the issue for now. The priest told her to go ahead and use them to protect her body. She has an appointment tomorrow with my priest, who is a bit older and very conservative.

It’s hard because obviously asking them never to be intimate as husband and wife again is… problematic, to say the least. Using condoms brings up potential moral concerns. The doctors say that this issue is uncommon enough that there is no really effective treatment for it.

My other concern is children… Is depositing washed sperm into the uterus explicitly forbidden? No embryo would be created outside of the body, right?

The group best qualified to answer her questions is here:

ncbcenter.org/page.aspx?pid=270

 

[Debora123]

Look, if you refuse to heed what the Vatican has to say about this, I can’t help you with it.

People always have the ability to claim that lies are truth, and I suppose this is just one of those times.

I’m not particularly bothered by this because I’m used to looking at non-Catholics. I’m a convert from a protestant family. But you should be concerned about it. Your opinion is directly contradictory to that of the Holy See.

Haha, I’m done.

Good luck, I hope things work out ok for you.

 

[Debora123]

Hi again,

Yes, she is seeing an allergist at UCLA (she has other, more common allergies too.) Right now the allergy is not considered anaphylactic, but with repeated exposure it could possibly get to that point. The doctors seem convinced that, for now, a plain condom used “correctly” is sufficient. The doctor indicated that avoidance of the allergen is appropriate (as with children who have nut allergies.) He said this is the least expensive and least invasive way to deal with the issue for now. The priest told her to go ahead and use them to protect her body. She has an appointment tomorrow with my priest, who is a bit older and very conservative.

It’s hard because obviously asking them never to be intimate as husband and wife again is… problematic, to say the least. Using condoms brings up potential moral concerns. The doctors say that this issue is uncommon enough that there is no really effective treatment for it.

My other concern is children… Is depositing washed sperm into the uterus explicitly forbidden? No embryo would be created outside of the body, right?

Yes, it is forbidden.

 

[Corki]

My math is terrible. 1 was repeated there, wasn’t it? When I add it up, I get 3, not 4. Eh, no big deal.

I added two new ones to the original two that Debra posted. There was no repetition. However, I also pointed out that one of Debra’s “options” may not be licit. So, yes, that would leave us with three.

 

[Debora123]

I added two new ones to the original two that Debra posted. There was no repetition. However, I also pointed out that one of Debra’s “options” may not be licit. So, yes, that would leave us with three.

Lol this is getting more and more bizarre by the minute.

Which one wouldn’t be licit?

The one where they’d have to abstain from all sexual activity or the one about finding some sort of treatment/cure?

Though I’ve encountered you before and know you specifically like being argumentative with me for some reason, so perhaps that’s all that’s going on here.

 

[Debora123]

I added two new ones to the original two that Debra posted. There was no repetition. However, I also pointed out that one of Debra’s “options” may not be licit. So, yes, that would leave us with three.

Which by the way YOUR option about them having sex less often (as though that would somehow cease the allergic reaction) is the one that wouldn’t work, and I think that was made clear by what the OP said here about the severity of her niece’s condition:

My niece’s reaction is severe and could become anaphylactic if she keeps exposing herself to semen. In fact, the doctor prescribed an epi pen for the possibility of an emergency.

So whadaya know, back to the original 2!!!

 

[ChibiViolet]

“Apparently, when they want to have children, she can take a high dose of antihistamine and have sperm injected into her falopian tubes (or something.)”–SanctaMommy

It is also of grave matter to procreate outside of the marital act. I will pray for your niece and husband, that they make the right decisions regarding this difficult matter.

 

[iloveangels]

“Apparently, when they want to have children, she can take a high dose of antihistamine and have sperm injected into her falopian tubes (or something.)”–SanctaMommy

It is also of grave matter to procreate outside of the marital act.

Yeah, you can’t separate conception from the act. It’s immoral. Human beings are not goods that you procure by means like that.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

So basically… they’re all out of luck? Bah!

 

[twoangels]

And if conception takes place, it prevents the embryo from attaching to the uterine wall.

Not all uses of the morning after pill involve rape either.

Right, but I thought treating rape victims with the morning after pill at Catholic hospitals was being discussed. Did I misunderstand? My understanding is that some Catholic hospitals will give the morning after pill if they verify fertilization has not occured. As such, fertilization should not occur in which case there would be no embryo to attach to the uterine wall. That being the case, how they’re even able to tell if fertilization has occured or not when implantation hasn’t taken place is beyond me. I mean, I know there are pictures of zygotes but I always assumed those were pretty invasive things, not things done regularly as a part of a rape treatment kit.

I do think the practice is morally questionable though.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Ok so again… where do we stand? We’re just praying for a “better” doctor at this point…?

 

[twoangels]

Thank you all for your replies. I am getting good feedback here. For those that have suggested it, my God-daughter has spoken with her priest about it. He said to of course follow her doctor’s recommendation to use condoms to prevent contact with the allergen (he said he used a dust-mite pillow cover for the same reason.) This didn’t seem quite right to me. My niece’s reaction is severe and could become anaphylactic if she keeps exposing herself to semen. In fact, the doctor prescribed an epi pen for the possibility of an emergency. I am very worried about her, but I know I cannot give her false advice. I am checking on the links to alternative therapies to see if those might work for her.

For the poster that thought the topic was lewd, I apologize. Sexuality and health does not seem lewd to me when it is being discussed respectfully and without the intent to arouse indecent passions.

Its good she got advise from a priest and its good you were concerned. We could debate whether or not the priest gave good advise or not, but a pastor has pastorial authority over his parishioners. He is morally culpable if he leads people astray. Granted if he is mistake, than he’s not culpable for that either. Its no different than how a marriage tribunal isn’t covered by infallibility. If the marriage tribunal rules that a marriage was invalid and you get married, you’re acting in good faith. If the marriage tribunal is wrong, God’s not going to fault you for knowledge that was out of your control.

 

[twoangels]

Ok so again… where do we stand? We’re just praying for a “better” doctor at this point…?

Its a complicated moral situation that is not going to be solved on an online forum. She has her priest, she has her doctor. We’re responsible for educating our consciences and seeking spiritual council when we need it. In regards to avoiding priests out of line with the magistrium, that determination should be done when we’re looking into parishes. Doing anything at this point goes beyond what you are required to do when discerning complicated moral situations. Doing anything more in effect leads to overscruplocity.

I am fully confident that even IF there are better medical options that her doctor is failing to inform her or IF there objectively speaking God wants something else, acting on prudent knowledge and advise she has been given (even if she corrects it at a later date) is not a mortal sin. She is NOT rejecting God. Obsessing about it has its own evils.